A Linguistic and Historical Analysis
Author: Mirwais Bawar
Abstract
This study examines the proposed linguistic relationship between Avestan, the liturgical language of Zoroastrianism, and Pashto, a modern Eastern Iranian language. While Avestan lacks attestation outside religious texts and clear ethnic attribution, recent scholarship has proposed various genealogical connections between these languages. This paper critically reviews existing theories regarding their relationship, analyzes linguistic evidence for shared features, and evaluates the historical and geographical contexts that may have facilitated language contact. The analysis draws on comparative phonological, lexical, and morphological data to assess whether Avestan and Pashto share a sister relationship within the Eastern Iranian branch or represent different evolutionary paths from a common ancestral language. Particular attention is given to the preservation of archaic features in Pashto that may reflect ancient Eastern Iranian linguistic substrates.
Keywords: Avestan, Pashto, Eastern Iranian languages, historical linguistics, comparative philology, Zoroastrianism
1. Introduction
The question of genetic relationships among Iranian languages remains one of the most complex issues in Indo-Iranian historical linguistics. Among the proposed connections, the relationship between Avestan—the liturgical language of the Zoroastrian religious corpus—and Pashto, spoken today by approximately 50 million people across Afghanistan and Pakistan, presents particular challenges for comparative analysis.
Avestan, as noted by Skjærvø (2009), is known exclusively from religious texts, with no secular inscriptions or documents providing independent attestation of the language. This limitation has led scholars to refer cautiously to “the language of the Avesta” rather than claiming knowledge of a complete linguistic system (Shinwari, 1990: 124–125). The absence of clear ethnic or geographical attribution further complicates attempts to establish its place within the Iranian language family tree.
Recent scholarship has proposed several models for the Avestan-Pashto relationship. Some researchers, including Geiger (1893) and Morgenstierne (1973), suggest a sister relationship within Eastern Iranian, while others, notably Zyar (2015), propose that Pashto descends from ancient Saka languages with Avestan representing a parallel development. This paper critically examines these proposals through systematic comparison of linguistic evidence and historical context.
2.The Avestan Corpus: Historical and Linguistic Context
2.1 Etymology and Composition of the Avesta
The term “Avesta” itself reflects the complex transmission history of these texts. As documented by Andreas and Henning (1933), the word likely derives from Middle Persian *upastāk*, meaning “fundamental text” or “authority.” Alternative etymologies proposed by Jackson (1896) and Bartholomae (1904) suggest derivations relating to “knowledge” or “protection,” though scholarly consensus remains elusive.
The compositional history of the Avesta spans multiple periods. Kellens (1989) identifies three main chronological strata: the Gathic material, attributed to Zarathustra himself and likely dating to the 7th-6th centuries BCE; the Younger Avesta, comprising liturgical and legal materials from the 5th-4th centuries BCE; and late additions from the Parthian and Sassanid periods. This extended composition period means that “Avestan” encompasses several chronological varieties of what may have been distinct but related languages (Hintze, 2009).
2.2 Geographic Origins and Cultural Context
The geographical origins of Avestan composition remain contested. While some Iranian scholars locate the earliest compositions in western Iran, the weight of linguistic and cultural evidence supports an eastern origin, specifically in ancient Bactria (de Jong, 1997). The Avesta contains numerous references to eastern Iranian geographical features and cultural practices, including detailed knowledge of the Oxus river system and Central Asian topography (Gnoli, 1980).
Particularly significant is the cultural context reflected in the texts. The economic activities described—pastoralism, early agriculture, and seasonal migrations—correspond closely to the lifestyle of eastern Iranian peoples rather than the settled urban civilizations of western Iran (Boyce, 1975). This cultural substrate provides important context for understanding potential connections with Pashto-speaking populations, who have historically occupied similar geographical regions and maintained comparable economic systems.
2.3 Script Development and Textual Transmission
The development of the Avestan script represents a remarkable achievement in preserving ancient pronunciation. As Hoffmann (1975) demonstrates, the 46-character Avestan alphabet was specifically designed to capture phonetic distinctions that had been maintained through oral transmission but were inadequately represented in contemporary writing systems.
This script emerged during the Parthian period (250 BCE-224 CE) when Zoroastrian priests, concerned about the deterioration of oral tradition, adapted Aramaic characters to create a writing system capable of preserving the precise pronunciation of sacred texts (Cantera, 2004). The phonetic precision of this script provides crucial evidence for reconstructing Avestan sound systems and comparing them with other Iranian languages.
3. Pashto: Historical Development and Linguistic Features
3.1 Historical Background
Pashto belongs to the Eastern Iranian branch of the Indo-Iranian language family. Its speakers, known as Pashtuns, have historically inhabited regions corresponding to ancient Bactria, Gandhara, and adjacent territories (Morgenstierne, 1973). While the earliest written attestation of Pashto dates only to the 16th century CE, the language preserves numerous archaic features that suggest considerable antiquity (MacKenzie, 1987).
The geographical distribution of Pashto speakers overlaps significantly with regions mentioned in the Avesta, particularly the areas around ancient Balkh and the Hindu Kush mountains. This geographical continuity has led several scholars to propose direct historical connections between Avestan-speaking communities and the ancestors of modern Pashtuns (Zyar, 2015).
3.2 Phonological Archaisms
Pashto preserves several phonological features that distinguish it from other modern Iranian languages and suggest retention of ancient characteristics. Most notably, Pashto maintains retroflex consonants, which are rare in Iranian languages but were present in ancient Indo-Iranian (Morgenstierne, 1973: 45-67).
The preservation of these sounds in Pashto, combined with their presence in Sanskrit and absence in most Iranian languages, suggests that Pashto developed in a region where substrate languages influenced phonological development or where ancient phonological systems were preserved through isolation (Kieffer, 1977).
4. Comparative Analysis: Linguistic Evidence for Relationship
4.1 Lexical Correspondences
Systematic comparison reveals significant lexical overlap between Avestan and Pashto. Core vocabulary items show regular sound correspondences that suggest genetic relationship rather than borrowing. Examples include:
– Avestan *brātar-* / Pashto *wrōr* (brother)
– Avestan *mātar-* / Pashto *mor* (mother)
– Avestan *pitar-* / Pashto *plār* (father)
– Avestan *zaoθra-* / Pashto *žōṛ* (strength, power)
These correspondences follow predictable sound changes consistent with the development of Eastern Iranian languages from Proto-Iranian (Emmerick, 1989).
4.2 Morphological Parallels
Both languages show similar patterns in verbal morphology and nominal inflection that distinguish them from Western Iranian languages. Particularly significant is the preservation of certain aspectual markers and the retention of more complex case systems than found in Persian or other Western Iranian languages (Skjærvø, 1989).
4.3 Syntactic Features
Comparative syntax reveals shared innovations in both languages that suggest either common development from a shared ancestor or intensive contact during their formative periods. These include similar patterns of ergativity, comparable auxiliary verb systems, and parallel developments in complex predicate formation (Roberts, 2000).
5. Theoretical Models of Relationship
5.1 The Sister Language Hypothesis
Morgenstierne (1973) and subsequent scholars have proposed that Avestan and the ancestor of Pashto developed as sister languages within the Eastern Iranian branch. This model suggests parallel evolution from a common Eastern Iranian ancestor, with subsequent independent development accounting for their differences.
Evidence supporting this model includes shared innovations that distinguish both languages from other Iranian languages, regular sound correspondences in cognate vocabulary, and comparable morphological archaisms not found elsewhere in the Iranian family.
5.2 The Substrate Hypothesis
An alternative model, proposed by Zyar (2015), suggests that Pashto developed from ancient Saka languages with significant Avestan substrate influence. This model accounts for shared features through language contact and cultural interaction rather than direct genetic relationship.
This hypothesis gains support from historical evidence of Saka-Bactrian interaction documented in Chinese and Classical sources, as well as the geographical distribution of both language groups across Central Asian trade routes (Harmatta, 1970).
5.3 The Continuation Hypothesis
A more radical proposal suggests that Pashto represents a direct continuation of dialects closely related to Avestan, with the modern language preserving features of ancient Eastern Iranian speech communities that were contemporaneous with Avestan composition (Kieffer, 2009).
While this model faces challenges from the chronological gap between Avestan composition and Pashto attestation, the remarkable preservation of archaic features in Pashto lends some credibility to claims of direct continuity.
6. Critical Evaluation and Methodological Considerations
6.1 Limitations of the Evidence
Several methodological issues complicate the comparative analysis of Avestan and Pashto. The restricted corpus of Avestan texts, limited to religious contexts, may not represent the full range of the ancient language. Similarly, the late attestation of written Pashto means that reconstructing its earlier stages relies heavily on comparative method and internal reconstruction.
The absence of intermediate stages between Avestan composition (6th century BCE) and early Pashto attestation (16th century CE) creates a chronological gap that makes direct comparison problematic. Sound changes and morphological developments during this period must be inferred rather than documented.
6.2 Alternative Explanations
Some apparent similarities between Avestan and Pashto may result from convergent development rather than genetic relationship. The preservation of archaic features in Pashto could reflect geographical isolation rather than direct inheritance from Avestan-related dialects.
Additionally, cultural contact between Zoroastrian communities and Pashto speakers throughout history may have facilitated lexical borrowing and structural influence that mimics genetic relationship (Emmerick, 2009).
7. Conclusion
The relationship between Avestan and Pashto remains one of the more intriguing problems in Iranian historical linguistics. While definitive proof of their genetic relationship awaits further evidence, the accumulated linguistic data suggests significant connections that exceed what would be expected from chance or distant genetic relationship alone.
The most plausible model, based on current evidence, positions Avestan and the ancestor of Pashto as closely related Eastern Iranian languages that shared a common ancestor within the past 3,000 years. Whether this relationship is best characterized as “sister languages” or represents varying degrees of substrate influence remains an open question requiring further investigation.
Future research directions should include systematic comparison with other Eastern Iranian languages, analysis of recently discovered manuscripts that may extend our knowledge of intermediate stages, and application of computational phylogenetic methods to Iranian language relationships. Only through such comprehensive investigation can we hope to resolve the complex historical relationships among these ancient and modern languages.
The broader significance of this research extends beyond pure linguistic investigation. Understanding the Avestan-Pashto connection illuminates patterns of cultural continuity and change in Central Asia, provides insights into the transmission of religious and literary traditions, and contributes to our knowledge of how languages develop and maintain their characteristics across millennia of historical change.
References
- Andreas, F. C., & Henning, W. B. (1933). Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan II. *Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften*, Phil.-hist. Klasse, 292-363.
- Bartholomae, C. (1904). *Altiranisches Wörterbuch*. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.
- Boyce, M. (1975). *A History of Zoroastrianism, Volume I*. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
- Cantera, A. (2004). Studien zur Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta. *Iranica*, 5, 1-86.
- de Jong, A. (1997). *Traditions of the Magi: Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Literature*. Leiden: Brill.
- Emmerick, R. E. (1989). Khotanese and Tumshuqese. In R. Schmitt (Ed.), *Compendium Linguarum Iranicarum* (pp. 204-229). Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
- Emmerick, R. E. (2009). Iranian languages. *Encyclopædia Iranica*, XIII/4, 344-377.
- Geiger, W. (1893). *Die Ostiran in Altertum*. Erlangen: Andreas Deichert.
- Gnoli, G. (1980). *Zoroaster’s Time and Homeland*. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
- Habibi, A. H. (2005). *History of Pashto Literature* [د پښتو ادبیاتو تاریخ]. Kabul: Danish Publishing House.
- Harmatta, J. (1970). Studies in the History of the Sarmatians. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
- Hintze, A. (2009). Avestan literature. In R. E. Emmerick & M. Macuch (Eds.), *The Literature of Pre-Islamic Iran* (pp. 1-71). London: I.B. Tauris.
- Hoffmann, K. (1975). *Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik*. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
- Jackson, A. V. W. (1896). The ancient Persian doctrine of a future life. *The Biblical World*, 8(4), 244-258.
- Kellens, J. (1989). Avesta. *Encyclopædia Iranica*, III/1, 35-44.
- Kieffer, C. M. (1977). The morphophonemics of the Pashto verb. *Studia Iranica*, 6, 205-228.
About the Author
